• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Fast bowling actions: side-on vs. front-on

LongHopCassidy

LongHopCassidy

International Captain
Which, in your opinion, is the generally more effective one? Obviously a hypothetical, but it'd be fascinating (not least to me) what their respective strengths and weaknesses are.

Obviously, there are greats such as Lillee and Trueman who made side-on the fast bowler's orthodoxy for decades. Bowlers like Steyn and Jimmeh continue the proud tradition.

On the other side of the coin, there's Wasim Akram, Malcolm Marshall and lately Vernon Philander of whom all preferred to expose both moobs at the point of release.

So which one is more accurate? More swingy/seamy? More reverse-swingy? More inury-prone? More popular at various levels? Easier/harder to learn?

Discuss.
 
Last edited:
A

Arachnodouche

International Captain
Most good bowlers have had a combination of both from where I stand. Other than Lillee, young Waqar, Kapil in the modern era, I can't think of many other legends from the last 30 years who've had classically side on actions. Ambrose, Mcgrath, Donald, Pollock etc were all an angular proposition.
 
ohnoitsyou

ohnoitsyou

International Regular
Arachnodouche said:
Most good bowlers have had a combination of both from where I stand. Other than Lillee, young Waqar, Kapil in the modern era, I can't think of many other legends from the last 30 years who've had classically side on actions. Ambrose, Mcgrath, Donald, Pollock etc were all an angular proposition.
Click to expand...
Hadlee?
 
wellAlbidarned

wellAlbidarned

International Coach
Daemon said:
Wait Steyn bowls side on?
Click to expand...
awta, he's halfway. So is jimmeh.

Getting totally side on in delivery stride is a waste of run-up momentumn. Imo, the reason more and more bowlers are becoming front on is because the optimal body flexion at the crease is around 45 degrees, any more than that and it's just extra effort dragging the body around.

in short, a good action is about halfway between.
 
Last edited:
wellAlbidarned

wellAlbidarned

International Coach
Arachnodouche said:
Most good bowlers have had a combination of both from where I stand. Other than Lillee, young Waqar, Kapil in the modern era, I can't think of many other legends from the last 30 years who've had classically side on actions. Ambrose, Mcgrath, Donald, Pollock etc were all an angular proposition.
Click to expand...
Neil Wagner? :ph34r:
 
SJS

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
The problem with discussing technique in cricket, batting or bowling, or keeping for that matter, is that people tend to get side tracked into divisions based on classifications like orthodox versus unorthodox or traditionalists versus modernists etc.

These are wrong and completely derail arguments from the logical and reasoning on the whys and what-fors of the technique being discussed to a discussion about the protagonists discussing the matter. This is sad for it prevents people from understanding the important aspects of the techniques and be objective about the basic grammar of the game and the reasons for and the effects of, if any, deviations from the rigid straight lines.

Until people stop making this mistake, the arguments will never get anywhere in my humble opinion.
 
smash84

smash84

The Tiger King
I knew you would post in here.

I remember you making some fantastic posts on the side on action in the fast bowlers thread
 
SJS

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
smalishah84 said:
didn't Imran, Lillee, Kapil have side on actions?
Click to expand...
Yes they did. Lillee and kapil from the very beginning while Iran modified his action as quoted in detail from his autobiography by me elsewhere to become more side on.
 
T

The Coach

Cricket Spectator
As Neil says there is a midway action too, not to be confused with a mixed action

To identify which action a bowler has, first observe the bowlers back foot position in the delivery stride. This will range [hopefully] from (a) pointing straight down the wicket towards the batter to (b) right-angles to the batter [parallel to the bowling crease]. If its (c) roughly halfway between at 45 degrees-ish this is defined as midway

Next observe the shoulder alignment at the moment of back foot landing, this will be somewhere between (x) side on [bowler looking over front shoulder - shoulders aligned towards batter] and (y) front on [chest facing batter].

Generally, a "safe" action requires hips and shoulders to align so a + y or b + x or c + (x or y) - gosh didn't mean to tun it into a mathematical equation.

A mixed action would be a + x or more commonly b + y - research indicates that this will inevitably lead to injury as the twisting action with force between hip and shoulder alignment causes back injury.

To answer the question which is best: not so easy. Side actions generally help away swing and front on tend to aid in-swing [not hard & fast]. There is a greater energy wash-off from the side-on action but if the bowler is quick, there's little effect on mph.

To answer the question which one to teach - its what comes natural - I do believe that side on is easier to bowl so that's the way ECB coaches are trained to teach - ie start with no run-up - sideways-on to target - back foot at 90 degrees to target & shoulders lined up to target ... and off you go - if they develop a front on action, don't try to stop that, but be watchful for mixed actions.

It's nigh on impossible to change from on to the other as the complex bio mechanics of the bowling action are ingrained in to muscle memory - but those with a mixed action must.
 
Last edited:
slowfinger

slowfinger

International Debutant
The Coach said:
As Neil says there is a midway action too, not to be confused with a mixed action

To identify which action a bowler has, first observe the bowlers back foot position in the delivery stride. This will range [hopefully] from (a) pointing straight down the wicket towards the batter to (b) right-angles to the batter [parallel to the bowling crease]. If its (c) roughly halfway between at 45 degrees-ish this is defined as midway

Next observe the shoulder alignment at the moment of back foot landing, this will be somewhere between (x) side on [bowler looking over front shoulder - shoulders aligned towards batter] and (y) front on [chest facing batter].

Generally, a "safe" action requires hips and shoulders to align so a + y or b + x or c + (x or y) - gosh didn't mean to tun it into a mathematical equation.

A mixed action would be a + x or more commonly b + y - research indicates that this will inevitably lead to injury as the twisting action with force between hip and shoulder alignment causes back injury.

To answer the question which is best: not so easy. Side actions generally help away swing and front on tend to aid in-swing [not hard & fast]. There is a greater energy wash-off from the side-on action but if the bowler is quick, there's little effect on mph.

To answer the question which one to teach - its what comes natural - I do believe that side on is easier to bowl so that's the way ECB coaches are trained to teach - ie start with no run-up - sideways-on to target - back foot at 90 degrees to target & shoulders lined up to target ... and off you go - if they develop a front on action, don't try to stop that, but be watchful for mixed actions.

It's nigh on impossible to change from on to the other as the complex bio mechanics of the bowling action are ingrained in to muscle memory - but those with a mixed action must.
Click to expand...
Great post.

I'd say c + x or y is the way to go but the main point was, whatever comes naturally, your body normally works its own equations out for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top